IEA Hydropower Technology Collaboration Program ExCo 2019
Transcript of IEA Hydropower Technology Collaboration Program ExCo 2019
ORNL is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for the US Department of Energy
IEA Hydropower Technology Collaboration ProgramExCo 2019
Hidden hydropower at non-powered dams: United States development trends, research priorities, and technology innovations
Adam Witt, PhDHydropower Systems Research EngineerOak Ridge National LaboratoryTokyo, Japan| February 4, 2019
22 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Annex XVI: Task 3: Adding Power to Non-Powered Dams and Water Management Facilities
• Review opportunities to add power to non-power dams and water management
facilities. Many existing dams, built for water supply, irrigation, flood control etc., have
potential to add hydropower to their discharge or diversion facilities. There is also
potential to replace pressure reducing valves, add power to existing water conduits,
irrigation canals and drop structures.
Red Rock Hydropower Project
36 MW
Lower Saint Anthony Falls Project
9.6 MW
33 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Overview
US non-powered dam (NPD) overview and development trends
US landscape of hydropower development in canals, conduits, and
water management facilities
Technology innovations
Research priorities
44 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Non-powered dams
55 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Sources: NHAAP (SHPs), NID (Dams), Foley et al., 2017 (Removals)
> 50% of all dam
removals have occurred
in the past 10 years
Dams, past and present
> 80% of all non-
powered dam
hydropower retrofits
have occurred in the
past 10 years
< 1% of all dams
present today were built
in the last 10 years
66 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Most dams have very little energy potential and serve some purpose other than hydropower generation
2,051 dams out of 90,000 have 5,608 MW out of 5,900 MW of hydropower potential…
# of dams
MWs
…that is, 2.2% of the dams have 95% of the hydropower potential
SOURCE: HydroSource, Witt et al., 2018
The majority of NPDs were built for recreation, flood control, or water supply
77 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US experience with NPD identification and assessment
National Lab/DOE US Army Corps of Engineers US Bureau of Reclamation
55,000 dams with 12 GW of potential
http://www.hydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Army-
Corps-NPD-Assessment.pdf
https://hydrosource.ornl.gov/hydropower-potential/non-
powered-dam-resource-assessment
223 dams with 6 GW of potential
https://www.usbr.gov/power/AssessmentReport/USBRHydroAssessmentFinalReportMarch2011.pdf
191 sites with 268 MW of potential
88 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Since 2006:• 58 NPDs licensed by FERC
• 33 small (<10 MW)• 24 medium(10 - 100 MW)• 1 large (> 100 MW)
• 888 MW • 3.7 TWh of annual energy
US trends in NPD development
Potential NPDs > 100kW = 2,051
Developed NPDs = 58
• Equivalent to removing
greenhouse emissions from:
SOURCE: Witt et al., 2018
Large MW dams targeted
99 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Powerhouse location # of NPDs
Mean rated power (MW)
Mean turbine
head (m)
Mean plant flow
(cms)
Mean estimated capacity factor
(%)
Primary PurposeN R FC WS I FW
Downstream penstock 19 8.1 38.1 36.1 42.8 1 3 6 6 2 1Adjacent to dam 14 34.8 5.9 709.5 50.8 9 4 0 0 1 0Downstream of dam 11 12.8 5.5 285.3 52.5 10 1 0 0 0 0Through dam 6 11.7 5.3 230.8 60.0 1 4 1 0 0 0In gate 5 3.8 22.2 39.7 43.1 1 0 4 0 0 0In lock 3 3.4 5.0 77.4 44.6 0 0 0 3 0 0
US Experience with NPD development
N = Navigation, R = Recreation, FC = Flood Control, WS = Water Supply, I = Irrigation, FW = Fish and Wildlife.
= powerhouse location
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e) (f)
1010 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Some NPD projects have installed costs favorable to intermittent renewables when considering capacity factors
SOURCE: Witt et al., 2018 (hydro); Lazard, 2018 (wind, solar)
Wind
Utility scale solar
Estimated capacity factorsInstalled cost of NPD ($/kW)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Solar
Wind
NPDs
Estimated LCOE ($/MWh)
Estimated LCOE
1111 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Investment in environmental protection and enhancement
• Annualized costs between $0 and $500,000 per measure
• Only ~1 in 6 measures exceeds $5,000 annually
• $0-$90/kW per project (annualized)
• Protection, mitigation, and enhancements makes up 0.25-27% of mean LCOE
• Average: 6.2%
• As part of the licensing process, every NPD goes through an environmental review that results in between 4 to 50 protection, enhancement, and mitigation measures
1212 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Basin-scale development approaches – project clusteringDeveloping multiple NPDs in series on a river simultaneously
SOURCE: http://www.ryedevelopment.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/EPC-RFQ-28-Nov-2018.pdf
• Standard plant designs drive cost
reductions by duplication and
economics of scale
• Multi-project cumulative impact
assessments help lead to improved
system outcomes
SOURCE: https://www.pittwire.pitt.edu/news/hydropower-plan-marks-pitt-s-largest-ever-commitment-renewable-energy
1313 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
NPD development overview
• Large NPDs have been disproportionately targeted for development
• Some movement towards smaller NPDs
• Navigation dams targeted primarily due to predictable pools and consistent generation
• Many projects are cost competitive and include protection/enhancement investments
• Clustering development approaches gaining traction
• Hydropower retrofit at NPD can help improve condition in long-term
• Growing interest in NPDs to meet carbon free energy goals because hydro is flexible enough to
provide a different set of grid services over time and space
1414 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Conduit, canal, water management facilities
1515 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US experience with canal, conduit, water management facility hydropower opportunity identification and assessment
• Most active field in terms of # of projects
• No national assessments
https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/innovative-
hydropower-technology-now-powering-apple-data-center
1616 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US Experience with conduit identification and assessment
Same basic method as NPDs but data is more scarce. For example:
https://hydropower-qa.ornl.gov/docs/projects/CRADA_Telluride_Final_Report_v7_Public.pdf
1717 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US Experience with conduit/canal development
• Make up the majority of plants currently planned for development
• As of August 2017, 87 conduit projects approved with a total capacity of
almost 32 MW
• Most active in western states, roughly evenly split between agricultural
and municipal projects
• Frequent requests for national inventory of opportunities, none currently exist
• Several state-level studies:
• Colorado: replacing pressure reduction valves could result in 25 MW of
potential at 1,000 to 5,000 sites
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/energyoffice/atom/60016
• California: 255 MW of potential from man-made conduitsat 128 sites
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-500-2006-065/CEC-
500-2006-065.PDF
• Bureau of Reclamation: 225 MW at 191 sites
https://www.usbr.gov/power/CanalReport/FinalReportMarch2012.pdf
1818 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Technology innovations
1919 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Industry-led R&D projects with DOE funding
• Floating powerhouse
• Low head, modular powertrains
https://www.natelenergy.com/turbines/
2020 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Industry-led R&D projects with DOE funding
• Floating intake with siphon
• Permanent magnet generator
turbine
http://www.nwhydro.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/04/Mike-Rickly-
Rickly-Hydro-.pdf
2121 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Industry-led R&D projects with DOE funding
• Archimedes screw with detachable blades made from composite materials
https://engineering.usu.edu/news/main-feed/2018/percheron-power
2222 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXvIMRklWiM
2323 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
2424 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyX-v83_5Zg
2525 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmXv2T03HOE
2626 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
The cost of a traditional hull ranges from
$600,000 to $800,000 and typically takes
3-5 months to manufacture.
Using BAAM reduced hull production
costs by 90% and shortened
manufacturing time to a matter of days.
2727 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
https://web.ornl.gov/sci/manufacturing/projectame/
2828 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Integrated hydraulic channels
2929 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Wind
Construction
Multi-scale, multi-material capabilitiesLarge scale demonstration projects
Marine
Auto
Aerospace
Small metal and composite components
3030 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Axial flow runner and conveyance: Amjet Turbine Systems
• Modular AM components
• ~10 kW at 25 ft of head
• Post-processing includes
machining and coatings
Ongoing: couple CFD to structural
solvers to model
long-term reliability
http://www.amjethydro.com/
3131 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
• Sand casting for metal gearbox (left) and AM parts (right)
• BAAM tooling for hydrofoil and spokes (78% cost savings)
Hydrokinetic turbine runner blades and gearbox housing: Emrgy
https://emrgy.com/
3232 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Research priorities
3333 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US areas of interest
Increase awareness and export of emerging tech for hidden hydropower
Support the development of low-head, modular designs that can reduce infrastructure
and construction costs and operate flexibly over a range of flow conditions at existing
dams.
Promote environmental stewardship as essential element of hydropower development at NPDs and water management facilities
Classification/organization of hidden hydro opportunities journal paper
• Grouping of similar opportunities into categories• Highlight examples from member countries
• Include targeted R&D efforts to date like ultra low head power trains
Contribute to broader hidden hydropower assessment framework (how can countries
identify hidden hydropower opportunities) and business, social, and environmental
models used to make hidden hydro pencil out
3434 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
US general resource assessment approach – can this be extended to other countries and hidden hydro opportunities?
Reliance on detailed dam
inventories as starting point
Layer on models and
development assumptions
Ranking, publication,
and data
dissemination
http://nid.usace.army.milHydrologic model
(flow)
Location
Purpose(s)
Dam type
Year built
Etc.
Technical data
(head)
Environmental
Attributes
(impacts/costs/legal)
Power and
cost estimate
Economics
(costs/revenue)
3535 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
Discussion questions
• Data availability? If none available, how to generate base level
databases?
• Country/regional access to national inventories
• New technology – machine learning?
• New low-cost generation technologies
• 3D printing and alternative materials
• Low head
• Creative business models
• Universities with renewables commitments
• Demand charge reduction (conduit plants)
• Data centers and ‘green conscious’ corporate buyers
3636 IEA Annex XVI Kickoff Workshop
References
HydroSource: https://hydrosource.ornl.gov/
National Inventory of Dams : http://nid.usace.army.mil/
Foley, M., Bellmore, J., O'Connor, J., Duda, J., East, A., Grant, G., Anderson, C., et al. "Dam removal: Listening in." Water Resources Research 53, no. 7 (2017): 5229-5246.
Witt, A., Uria-Martinez, R., Johnson, M., Werble, J., Mobley, M., O'Connor, P. 2018. United States trends in non-
powered dam electrification. International Journal on Hydropower and Dams, 33-38.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327445734_United_States_trends_in_non-
powered_dam_electrification
Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy - Version 12. 2018. https://www.lazard.com/media/450784/lazards-levelized-
cost-of-energy-version-120-vfinal.pdf